Women are drastically under-represented within computer science, which is in
part informed by societal ideas of who can and should belong in the sciences. Less is
known about how children evaluate their peers who challenge gendered expectations
of who can and should take part in computer science. The present study asked
children ...
Women are drastically under-represented within computer science, which is in
part informed by societal ideas of who can and should belong in the sciences. Less is
known about how children evaluate their peers who challenge gendered expectations
of who can and should take part in computer science. The present study asked
children (n = 213; female n = 110) from middle (Mage = 8.71, n = 108) and late
childhood (Mage = 10.56, n = 105) to evaluate a gender-matched peer who challenged
a group norm related to either computer science (male-gendered domain) or biology
(less male-gendered domain). Male participants most negatively evaluated a peer who
wanted to take part in a biology activity when the rest of the group wanted to do a
programming activity. Further, male participants expected their group to negatively
evaluate this deviant peer in the programming condition. Mediation analysis revealed
that for boys in the computer science condition, perceived group evaluation predicted
individual evaluation. Female participants, in contrast, did not negatively evaluate
someone who challenged a STEM peer group norm. This study demonstrates that
male peer groups may perpetuate the idea that computer science is for men through
negative evaluation of in-group members who challenge those ideas, and in turn
maintain their dominant position as the high-status group. Achieving equity in the
computer science field will require a greater understanding of these peer group norms.